UN GATE, Sept 5 –
Before Inner City Press was roughed
up by UN Secretary
General Antonio Guterres'
Security on June 22 and July
3, 2018 and banned since
then, it insistently asked
for disclosure of Guterres' links
to convicted UN
briber CEFC China Energy
and silence on China's abuses
in Xinjiang and Hong Kong.

The questions are
not been answered by Spokesman
Stephane Dujarric, who on 2
November 2018 simply bicycled
away as Inner City Press
asked about Guterres' failure
in Cameroon and attempt to get
even Park East Synagogue to
oust Inner City Press from
covering his 31 October 2018
speech about tolerance.

Now after
on August 30 Guterres and his
USG Melissa Fleming denied
Inner City Press' application
to even enter the UN to cover
the UNGA high level week like
dozens from Chinese state
media, this: "The letter by
135 NGOs urges UN
Secretary-General Antonio
Guterres and High Commissioner
for Human Rights Michele
Bachelet to condemn China's
escalating abuse of UN rules
to censor, interrupt and block
references at the world body
to its detention of an
estimated 1 million Muslim
Uighurs. The joint
complaint references an
incident in March, widely
shared on social media, in
which UN Watch director Hillel
Neuer took the floor at the UN
Human Rights Council to
condemn China's abuses of
Uighur Muslims. Neuer was
interrupted three times by the
Communist regime's delegates
in an attempt to shut down his
testimony. As noted in
the complaint, UNHRC President
Coly Seck of Senegal urged
Neuer to "stick to the agenda
item" on racial
discrimination, implying that
China's abuses against Muslim
Uighurs did not qualify. Later
in the debate, however, Seck
told China to “prevent
disturbing the proceedings of
the room the next time.”
When UN Watch submitted the
joint complaint by 125 NGOs
about the incident, the UNHRC
secretariat—in a break from
past practice—refused to
publish it, together with four
other submissions. "In
our 15 years of submitting
written statements to the UN
for publication, this is the
first time I've experienced
such blatant, heavy-handed and
unapologetic censorship," said
Neuer today. "In 2005
and 2010, the UN asked us to
make certain modest edits to
written statements, such as
replacing the word 'regime'
with 'government', but we've
never seen anything like this
before." "That the
UN is now barring the entire
publication of major NGO
statements while refusing to
tell us which word, sentence
or even statement is allegedly
in breach of a UN rule is
simply Kafkaesque. By
exercising arbitrary
censorship, the UN is also in
breach of our right to freedom
of expression, as guaranteed
under Article 19 of the
International Covenant on
Civil and Political
Rights." Also Censored:
Complaint Over UN Handing
Names of Dissidents to
China One of the other
censored UN Watch submissions
urged the UNHRC secretariat to
stop its potentially
life-threatening practice of
providing China with names of
human rights dissidents who
are accredited to attend UN
sessions. Dutch Foreign
Minister Stef Block, replying
to queries filed by lawmakers,
noted that the UN Ethics
Office confirmed that a “list
of names” of activists
registered to attend sessions
of the UN Human Rights Council
was handed to Chinese
authorities by OHCHR.
Whistelblower Emma Reilly
tried to stop this practice,
and was stifled; her case
before a UN tribunal has now
been stopped after the UN
chief removed the judge at the
last minute. UN Refuses
to Specify Reasons for
Censorship On July 30th,
after UN Watch had asked why
its statements were not
published, the UN refused to
specify which statements or
words it found objectionable,
instead making only a general
remark that submissions must
be "relevant to the work of
the Human Rights Council" and
must not contain "personal
attacks against individuals."
The UN failed to specify where
the complaint had allegedly
violated any UN rule or
regulation. In reaction
to this unprecedented
censorship, UN Watch filed an
appeal with the UN
Secretary-General on August
8th, protesting the "alarming"
UNHRC action, and noting its
selectivity. The appeal
also noted that the HRC
Secretariat's failure to
specify specific objections to
the submission "infringes on
NGO rights and appears to be a
form of censorship."
Yesterday, in a meeting with
the President of the Human
Rights Council in Geneva, his
advisor confirmed that UN
Watch's appeal to UN chief
Guterres was rejected. Eric
Tistounet, Chief of the Human
Rights Council Branch at the
UN's Office of the High
Commissioner for Human Rights
(OHCHR), stated that the UN
has the right to "intervene"
to prevent written submissions
which include "personal
attacks," and that in doing so
the UN is "not censoring
anybody." Listen here
at 5:38-6:54...

On
June 14 Dujarric said this,
about Guterres'
counter-terrrorism envoy on a
dubious trip to Xinjiang to
bluewash the mass detention of
Uighurs: "Vladimir Voronkov is
on an official trip to China
at the invitation of the
Chinese Government... there
will be some sort of a press
release from his office at the
end of his visit at some point
over the weekend."

With
Guterres and his spokesman
refusing to answer Press
questions, now Inner City
Press has in writing asked
them to respond to this:
"Dolkun Isa, president of
theWorld Uyghur Congress,
called the Xinjiang visit by
Voronkov “an irrevocable
mistake on the part of General
Secretary Guterres.” “It
is truly shameful for the UN
that its Under Secretary for
Counterterrorism Vladimir
Voronkov visited East
Turkestan and China at a time
anywhere from one to three
million Uyghurs have been
locked up in Chinese
concentration camps for more
than two years,” he told RFA
on Monday. “This
official visit, approved by
the UN General Secretary
Antonio Guterres, allows China
to link its crimes against
humanity in East Turkestan as
a necessary counterterrorism
measure,” said Isa.
“Instead of raising and
investigating China’s horrific
treatment of the Uyghur
people, the visit by Voronkov
should be seen as the UN not
only endorsing China’s
repression of the Uyghur
people but rather legitimizing
and collaborating with the
authoritarian government in
Beijing to further suppress
the Uyghur people.”

And from
the UN, no answers. Online,
this canned statement, that
said Voronkov “briefed on the
implementation of the United
Nations Global
Counter-Terrorism Strategy and
its four pillars, which focus
on conditions conducive to
terrorism, preventing and
countering terrorism and the
role of the United Nations,
and upholding human rights and
the rule of law.”

On Sunday
June 16, with Guterres' envoy
Voronkov having left Xinjiang
after blue washing it, nothing
from the UN, only this from
China's Foreign Ministry:
Voronkov had visited Beijing
and Xinjiang from June 13-15,
meeting senior diplomats
including Vice Foreign
Minister Le Yucheng; these two
sides "had a deep exchange of
views on the international
counter-terrorism situation
and counter-terrorism
cooperation between China and
the United Nations, and
reached a broad consensus",
the ministry said.

And from
totally sold out Guterres' UN,
nothing, despite what Dujarric
said on camera. We'll have
more on this.

The
media Guterres and Dujarric
work with to conceal just how
corrupt Guterres' UN has
become are trying to downplay
Guterres' role and financial
links, and for example
sloppily praise the UK.
Reuters
stated that the UK also
opposes - then runs a quote
from an unnamed UNSC diplomat.
Oops.
A scribe's former boss is
quoted without disclosure of
the conflict; the former boss
has written, here,
to Dujarric to get Inner City
Press thrown out. Guterres'
and Dujarric's UN and their
collaborators are in fact
similar to China and its state
media.

Now on June
14 from the US State
Department spokesperson Morgan
Ortagus, this:
"Deputy Secretary John J.
Sullivan spoke by phone today
with United Nations
Secretary-General António
Guterres to convey deep
concerns regarding
Under-Secretary-General of the
United Nations
Counter-Terrorism Office
Vladimir Voronkov’s planned
travel to Xinjiang,
China. The Deputy
Secretary expressed that such
a visit is highly
inappropriate in view of the
unprecedented repression
campaign underway in Xinjiang
against Uighurs, ethnic
Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, and other
Muslims. The Deputy
Secretary noted that Beijing
continues to paint its
repressive campaign against
Uighurs and other Muslims as
legitimate counterterrorism
efforts when it is not, and
stressed that the UN’s topmost
counterterrorism official is
putting at risk the UN’s
reputation and credibility on
counterterrorism and human
rights by lending credence to
these false claims. The
Deputy Secretary advocated for
unmonitored and unhindered
access to all camps and
detainees in Xinjiang by UN
human rights officials."

So
Guterres' capitulation
politically to China is
becoming known. But what about
his personal financial links,
and his censorship of the
Press to cover them up? Watch
this site.

Three
times in early June 2019banned
Inner City Press in writing
asked Guterres and Dujarric, "On
China and
human rights,
what is the
SG's belated
comment today
on the 30th
anniversary of
the slaughter
by the
government of
non violent
demonstrators
in Tiananmen
Square?" In
the June 3 UN noon
briefing, here
was Guterres'
answer:

Spokesman
Dujarric:
"No, I have no
particular
comment on
that.
Okay.
Thank you very
much.
See you
tomorrow." Vine
video here.

No, only those
they allow in
to the UN and
its
briefing. So
while ignoring
Inner City
Press'
follow up
questions,
inside his
briefing room
Dujarric
issued this
dodge: "I
think the
Secretary…
we're
commenting on
things that
are happening
today, right
now, under his
watch."

In
light of this
"bygones"
dodges,
why is Guterres
blaming
the UN's
budget crunch
on the
previous
Secretary
General who
hasn't been at
the controls
for two and a
half years?
Guterres is
killing the
UN.

On May 14,
Inner City Press asked
Guterres and Dujarric, "May
14-1: On China, human rights
and NYC, what is the SG's
comment and action if any on
that a state-owned Chinese
shipping company refused to
lease an office space in NYC
to Amnesty International
USA? Cosco Shipping acquired
Orient Overseas in 2017, and
took ownership the company’s
real estate investments,
including the office building
in question, called Wall
Street Plaza. Amnesty
said the organization was told
that it is “not the best
tenant” for a building owned
by a Chinese state-owned
firm." More than a day later,
no answer. One wonders the
position of Mayor De Blasio
and his International Affairs
representative Penny
Abeywardena...

On May 15,
Inner City Press asked
Guterres and Dujarric, "May
15-1: On China and the UN,
beyond the ban on Taiwan
journalists, what is the SG's
explanation and/or action on
that former political
prisoners in China who now
reside in the United States
were informed by the UN
accreditation desk in Geneva
that they could not enter the
premises without a passport
from a UN member state. As
political dissidents who have
fled from China, the visitors
did not have valid passports
from the country? Dissidents
who flee their home countries
due to persecution are often
not issued passports from
their countries of refuge but
are rather issued other valid
forms of identification."

Eight
hours later, no answer. But
there's this, sent to Inner
City Press by several outraged
UN staffers: "Scheduled
demonstration outside VIC Gate
1 on Thursday, 16 May 2019,
10:00 -12:00
hours. This is to
inform VIC staff that on
Thursday, 16 May 2019, between
10:00 hrs and 12:00 hrs there
will be an authorized
demonstration of approximately
100 demonstrators in Muhammad
Asad Platz outside VIC Gate
1. The organizers
describe their demonstration
message to "Support Taiwan’s
participation to the World
Health Organisation".
The UN Security and Safety
Service, together with the
host country police, will
monitor this event for its
duration. Office
of the Chief, Security and
Safety Service United Nations
Department of Safety and
Security United Nations Office
at Vienna." Yeah, Guterres' UN
will monitor this event, and
movement, for the duration. To
(try to) save the UN, dump
Guterres.

While
Guterres was in China banned
Inner City Press in writing
asked him and his spokesman
Stephane Dujarric about
China's crackdown in Hong Kong
- no answer at all. Now even
according to CNBC, tens of
thousands of people marched on
Hong Kong’s parliament on
Sunday to demand the scrapping
of proposed extradition rules
that would allow people to be
sent to mainland China for
trial — a move which some fear
puts the city’s core freedoms
at risk. Opponents of
the proposal fear further
erosion of rights and legal
protections in the
free-wheeling financial hub —
freedoms which were guaranteed
under the city’s handover from
British colonial rule to
Chinese sovereignty in 1997.
Guterres said nothing. And
when, CNBC reports,
China censored its reporting
from being broadcast in China,
again nothing. Then again,
Guterres has had critical
Press roughed up and banned
from the UN, for 298 days. He
is corrupt.

On April
27 from Beijing, from
Guterres' second craven Belt
and Road Initiative speech in
as many days as he conceals
his links with BRI briber
China Energy Fund Committee
which tried to buy the oil
company of Gulbenkian
Foundation which has paid
Guterres: "I can assure you,
Mr. President [Xi Jinping of
China], that the UN will do
everything possible to help
towards the success of the
Belt and Road Initiative...
the Belt and Road Initiative,
with its huge volume of
investment, is an opportunity
we cannot miss." Guterres will
do anything to conceal his own
personal financing link to UN
briber CEFC China Energy,
through Gulbenkian Foundation
whose payments to him he
omitted from his public
financial disclosure covering
2016. From Guterres's
April 26 singing for supper
speech: "Convened by President
Xi Jinping, we come together
at this forum on the Belt and
Road in the face of
uncertainty and unease around
the
globe.
I want to recognize China for
its central role as a pillar
of international cooperation
and multilateralism... United
Nations country teams stand
ready to support Member States
in capacity and governance
building, and in achieving a
harmonious and sustainable
integration of the Belt and
Road projects in their own
economies and societies in
accordance with national
development plans, anchored in
the 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development. The
world needs to take profit of
the Belt and Road Initiative
to help close significant
financing gaps for achieving
the Sustainable Development
Goals, especially in the
developing world, in
particular, the need for about
$1 trillion needed for
infrastructure investments in
developing countries.... The
United Nations is poised to
support the alignment of the
Belt and Road Initiative with
the Sustainable Development
Goals, to share knowledge, and
to make the most of the
opportunities of this
large-scale initiative for
maximum sustainable
development
dividends.
Let us work together to
restore trust by making good
on the shared promise of the
2030 Agenda and our common
commitment to leave no one
behind.
Thank you."

Before 10 am on
April 25, Inner City Press
asked Guterres' spokesman
Stephane Dujarric, as well as
Guterres' email address and
that of his deputy and Alison
Smale, "April 25-1: Now
that SG Guterres is
lavishing praise on
China's "Belt and Road"
please immediately provide
the full transcript of
Guterres' "interview with
Chinese journalists" from
which this propaganda came
out: "UN Secretary-General
Antonio Guterres said
Tuesday that the Belt and
Road Initiative is a "very
important opportunity" to
the world. With such a
huge volume of investment
for international
cooperation as the Belt
and Road Initiative, it is
a "very important
opportunity for enhancing
the capacity to implement
the sustainable
development goals and an
important opportunity to
launch green perspectives
in the years to come,"
Guterres said during an
interview with Chinese
journalists at the UN
headquarters before
leaving for the second
Belt and Road Forum for
International Cooperation
in Beijing. (Xinhua)."
Immediately state how many
staff of Xinhua and other
Chinese state media the UN
DPI/DGC has granted
accreditation to to
currently enter the
UN.

April 25-2:
Immediately state how much
Guterres and team's trip to
China is costing, the size
and composition of the UN
delegation, and who is
paying for it (given that
even the PGA now discloses
this information).
Again, state whether after
the UN bribery conviction of
Patrick Ho of CEFC, and
CEFC's attempt to purchase
the oil company of
Gulbenkian Foundation which
paid Mr. Guterres in 2016
(omitted from his online
public financial disclosure
covering 2016), he intends
to raise corruption and UN
bribery issues with China." More than seven
hours later, no answer at
all. But the UN South
South Cooperation
Office, which fronted for Chinese
businessman Ng
Lap Seng,
was tweeting
photos of its
meetings in
Beijing
includingJorge Chediek
and his
(Chinese) deputy
Xiaojun Grace
Wang, here. China
was bragging
that Guterres
would cravenly
show up at its
Belt and Road
event, after
Guterres
refused to
audit UN
briber CEFC
China Energy.
CEFC tried to
buy the oil
company of
Lisbon based
Gulbenkian
Foundation the
payments of
which to
Guterres were
not included
in his public
financial
disclosure
covering 2016.
This was
days after
Guterres'
Alison Smale
and Tal Mekel
summarily denied
Inner City
Press
application to
re-enter the
UN to ask
questions, and
after guards
physically pushed
Inner City
Press out of
the line for a
press freedom
event in the
UN it was
invited to and
had a ticket
for, then
refused to
provide the
banned-by-Guterres
list they said
was the basis
of their
action.

Back on September
7 Inner City Press reported
that Guterres intends to use
even Kofi Annan's death and
the September 13 event in
Ghana as a pretext to again
fly to Lisbon. He'll turn it
into a five day junket,
leaving New York on September
11 (when he's arranged a
Myanmar white washing CPPF
meeting, also reported
exclusively by banned Inner
City Press, here),
offer praise sure to be ironic
of Kofi Annan who Rest in
Peace never had a critical
journalist roughed up and
banned - then fly to Lisbon on
the public dime, until
September 16. How much will it
cost? The UN refuses to
answer. But it is not their
money. And the climate of
cover up includes Guterres not
disclosing his own son Pedro
Guimarães e Melo De Oliveira
Guterres' business links in
Africa and elsewhere. We'll
have more on this: it is what
journalism is supposed to do,
hold institutions and those
who lead them accountable.

Here from
multiple member state sources
and open
source are the dates of
Guterres' first 14 -- 30% of
total UN trips - through
Lisbon for each of which Inner
City Press has asked, and not
been answered, and live-stream
Periscope of the UN's empty
massion on 57th Street and
Sutton Place for which it was
roughed up and banned:

Do the
member states paying for this
- whom Guterres' Smale quotes
without name as supporting the
roughing up of and permanent
ban on Inner City Press, agree
with this? Do they know this?

How arrogant or
out of touch a self-styled
world leader is has been
revealed in the Leader's
contemptuous approach to
freedom of the press and whose
who even gently chide him on
it, including a Nobel Peace
Prize winner. No, this is not
a reference to Donald Trump,
but to UN Secretary General
Antonio Guterres. The Nobel
Peace Prize winner who has
sought the reversal of
Guterres' outrageous 56 day
and counting ban on Inner City
Press even entering the UN is
Jose Ramos Horta of Timor
Leste, still serving Guterres'
UN, who told Inner City Press
on August 27, "Dear Matthew I
did reach the very inner
sanctum of the UN system
reporting on your case to no
avail. Apologies but I don't
know what else I can do."

Later on August
27 an independent journalist
asked Guterres' spokesman
Stephane Dujarric why things
are not fixed with Inner City
Press' access, since it "looks
bad" given other attacks on
press freedom. Video here.
Dujarric tried to cut the
journlist off, insisting to
say this is about freedom of
the press would be wrong.
(Then why is it in the Press
Freedom Tracker, here,
and the Columbia
Journalism Review, among
others
for example in the UK,
Japan,
Italy
and Cameroon?)

Dujarric changed
the earlier reference to Inner
City Press being in a "garage
ramp" - something Guterres'
Alison Smale never asked Inner
City Press about - to being in
the "parking lot." (Inner City
Press' pass worked to get
there, many use it as a way to
exit, and several senior UN
official, anti-Guterres
sources of Inner City Press
ask to meet it and give it
documents there. Maybe that's
the reason.) Dujarric then
said that Inner City Press
creates a "hostile
environment" for the
diplomats, some times
correspondents and always UN
officials it covers. Seems
clear the ban is entirely
about freedom of the Press,
freedom to question, and a
Secretary General and
vindictive team of holdovers
who seek to retaliate against
questions and coverage,
including live streamed
covering, with a lifetime ban
with no appeal. Here
is an example of Inner City
Press' August 28 questioning
at the Delegates Entrance,
since Guterres and Alison
Smale have banned it from the
Security Council stakeout. Is
this
hostile? China - and
Guterres - would say so, then
bluewash their abuse.

In her
lifetime ban
letter, outgoing
USG Alison
Smalealso
claimed that
Guterres'
spokesmen
would answer
Inner City
Press' e-mailed
questions. But
this it
false. Of the
fourteen
question Inner
City
Press e-mailed
to them,
and Smale,
and Deputy
SG Amina
J. Mohammed
and others on
August 23 and
24, not one
was answered.
Not one.
Including:
"August 24-3:
Given that
Deputy
Spokesman Haq
told
IPS “we
respect his
press rights,
but we also
want to
respect
other’s press
rights. And
some
journalists
feel their
press rights
have been
impeded by his
actions” -
state, since
this is the
basis of me
being banned,
who these are,
and how they
feel their
press rights
have been
impeded by my
actions. Also
all video and
other evidence
that Haq
alluded to to
IPS should be
produced,
today, since
it is the
basis of my
being banned."
Nothing has
been provided,
eight
hours later, by Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric who was
drawing pay all
day
after having
essentially
ordered or
passed on from his
boss the
order to rough up
Inner
City Press.

From
the IPS
article: "Lee
has been known
for asking
thought-provoking
questions
during daily
briefings and
at press
stakeouts. He
has reported
on global
conflicts such
as those in
Sri Lanka,
Congo,
Somalia, and
others... However,
the incidents
with Lee
started back
in 2012, when
he was warned
by the DPI to
treat his
fellow
journalists
with respect."
That's not the
case.

In 2012, the
President of
the UN
Correspondents
Association
Giampaolo
Pioli, who had
rented one
of him Manhattan
apartments
to one Palitha
Kahona then unilaterally
granted his
request or
demand for an
UNCA screening
of the war
crimes denial
film of the Sri Lanka
government he
represented at
the UN,
ordered Inner
City Press to
remove from the
Internet its
article about
the conflict
of interest.
Inner City Press
declined but offered
to publish any
response, at any
length. Pioli
and the UNCA
board demanded
removal of the
article, and
ultimately
Inner City Press quit UNCA
and
co-founded
FUNCA, the
Free UN Coalition for
Access.

The UN claimed it
was uninvolved
- instead,
then head of
Accreditation
Stephane
Dujarric tried
to condition
Inner City Press'
re-accreditation as a
resident
correspondent
on more
positive
coverage of
the Secretariat,
specifically
his fellow Frenchman
Herve
Ladsous, the
head of Peacekeeping who
famously said peacekeepers
would rape less
if they had
more
"R&R." So
from 2012 it
was the UN
trying to
strong arm
positive
coverage of
its officials,
and using the aura of
"other correspondents"
in UNCA as the
leverage -
making UN the
UN Censorship
Alliance.

***

Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com

UN Office: S-303,
UN, NY 10017 USA

Reporter's mobile (and weekends):
718-716-3540

Search
innercitypress.com Search
WWW (censored?)

Other, earlier Inner City Press are
listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.